Oscar Pistorius Trial: 24 Monday 2014, Session 2

[@suniltunwer]

Mrs Stipp has the most beautiful voice. Who agrees?

[@dlyras]

He may as well ask her if she remembers hearing crickets that evening, and if so were they louder on the smaller or bigger balcony? Then when she says she isn't sure, he can say "You see, now can you really say then that you remember everything about that evening?" This defense's cross examination is desperate and ridiculous.

[@Tessietots]

I like My Lady.. she is on the ball.. she is very quiet up there, but taking everything in... She is one very competent lady

[@diamondgate3]

With this witness the prosecution has driven the final nail into the coffin of the defense's case. Mrs. Stipp is a very credible witness who did not flinch under all the cross examination. Great job Gerry Nel! I have to say that this defense lawyer was not nearly as vicious as Barry Roux was with the very first prosecution witness. Roux was downright abusive of that poor woman, but she took it all. Love these brave women, standing up for Reeva and her family.

[@stephb2263]

@m eleka there is no doubt that most of us adult women watching can picture what happened. We escaped. She did not.

[@stephb2263]

Happens all the time, all social classes all over the world, mothers must teach their sons that they will never get away with battering a woman, sadly they do get away with it until...

[@chriscaine7689]

"May I put it to you Mr Olwage, that your client is lying and all other witnesses are telling the truth, would you agree with me, is that not so"???

[@blue-sv4wk]

The light in the far left window could have been coming in through the doorway from the light on in the other room. Her testimony is completely contradictory to OP's who said the lights were all out during the shooting. They are trying so hard to make her unbelievable. I find her to be completely credible.

[@SelamatArtist]

Oscar is an interested party!

[@HaveYouHeardMe]

*The witness' live in Domestic House Keeper's Testimony!* written 3/24/14 (9:00 pm) Around 44:33 The DEFENSE attorney read the witness her live in Domestic House Keeper's Testimony and it read, "I JUST fell asleep, when I was woken up by CRYING. I 1st thought it was the baby next door. I listened and then I realized that it was a woman that was crying. I was still listening to the crying trying to find out where it was coming from and then I heard BOOM, BOOM, BOOM!" First of all, it seems like the Domestic House Keeper slept through the 1st shot AND if the DOMESTIC HOUSE KEEPER heard CRYING from Oscar's house, ALL the way to where SHE was, it was NOT just CRYING but CRYING in the form of CRYING & SCREAMING. Some people choice of words may be different but this is when DISCERNMENT comes in. You MUST articulate what the witness is trying to say at times. At any rate, the DOMESTIC HOUSE KEEPER heard CRIES from Reeva ALL the way over to HER section of the house and THEN, SHOTS! So, that's ANOTHER witness who WITNESSED hearing Reeva SCREAM/ CRY SO LOUD (BEFORE) Oscar SHOT and KILLED her with the 2nd round of consecutive shots.

[@Tessietots]

The defense reminds me of a school teacher.. correcting his pupils work.. Editing.. Correcting. Pulling apart every nuance! Mind Blowing! The defense team looks worried.

[@ravenorama]

Anette Stipp has been the most credible witness for the prosecution so far, having consistently resisted the prosecution's attempts to undermine her. She is also the best witness, having been awake before events took place, and being a woman is likely to recognise the sound of another woman's screaming. The defence is rather pathetically labouring the point about her bedroom curtain to try to discredit her evidence that the lights were on in Pistorius' house prior to the shooting. Both the lights and the screaming in Anette Stipp's evidence is contrary to Pistorius' story. I can't see that Anette Stipp or any other witnesses has anything to gain by incriminating Pistorius, but he certainly has a great deal to lose, and it is clear who's version of events is beginning to ring more true. Although I've tried, I can't believe Pistorius anymore. I think that if the witnesses who heard screaming were uncertain about it (being male or female) then they'd have said so. They've all been quite adamant that they heard a woman's screams. We know Pistorius has a temper, and has been accused of two incidents of shooting without thinking. Also I'm sorry to say it but having seen Reeva Steenkamp's reality tv efforts (in which she talks about being 'in love with love') and her best friend in conversation, I can imagine that as well as being very beautiful she might have been incredibly annoying too.

[@bouncyshak]

What a weak line of questioning! Even the judge practically says so....

[@danmain325]

Surely pistorious gets sent down for this from what I've heard he's as guilty as sin

[@karenmoynihan1879]

Her story hasn't changed no matter how many different ways Mr Olwage has asked it! Move on already!!!!1

[@Tessietots]

Oh my gosh!! he actually argues with My lady.. he even talks over her!!!!!!!! such a Bully

[@marknic79]

I don't think my Lady likes Oldwage!!! She keeps questioning him 'Go Girl' My Lady rocks!!!

[@dumplingsmmm]

I love how the defence is trying to say it's a crazy/bad thing that a husband and wife would talk about what they heard

[@marknic79]

Is it just me or has this cross examination been an absolute shambles!!! The defence is grasping at straws and its starting to show!!

[@nickylup9566]

if Oscar is telling the truth.which it's super super hard to believe him. because this is the first home burglar that I know of that goes in to the bathroom.that's one place they don't go into. In less it is a inside job and that person knows there is a safe in the bathroom. typically burglars don't go in to the bathrooms....we will see when it comes to a close what that outcome will be we will seeeeeeeee

[@dumplingsmmm]

Oscar screams like a woman, a cricket bat sounds like gunshots. Defence is laughable.

[@soniatakeda2808]

This advocate Oldwage is complaining about the prosecution witness that could not remember about dogs barking. A lot worse is Oscar saying, "I'm not sure, My Lady!"

[@blue-sv4wk]

This defense attorney is just another bag of wind. He doesn't merely split hairs. He splits the DNA strands of hair.

[@egw6659]

And as he does so, Pistorius loses his fortune paying for his 'star' lawyers. Ah well, small mercies! :)

[@blue-sv4wk]

I won't shed a tear over the loss of his money. He sounds like a giant knob. After hearing Reeva's remarks about his behavior, makes me think he is an insecure, egomaniac that demands constant attention. I hope he gets found guilty of first degree murder. Do people really wear vests and shorts to bed in South Africa? She sounded as if she was dressed and on her way out of there.

[@egw6659]

Yeah, insecure egomaniac at best. Probably some sort of narcissistic sociopath at worst.

[@blue-sv4wk]

I had to laugh when I heard he complained because she chewed gum. Most men would let her chew on their leg if she wanted to. She was a beautiful women inside and out.

[@egw6659]

oh christ, I haven't got to that part yet. It's going to make me really angry though, I can tell.

[@dumplingsmmm]

Lol they are trying so hard to discredit her because her testimony is devastating to Oscar's case. If Reeva screamed, it's murder.

[@almightyminimite]

Why only can hear the witnesses and Pistorius voice but can't see them?

[@danielking9830]

If the left curtain is tied in the centre, then there is still clearly enough open space to see Oscar's house and windows!

[@HaveYouHeardMe]

*The DEFENSE was VERY RUDE to the JUDGE and REALLY (angered) the JUDGE!* The DEFENSE get's SPANKED AGAIN! written 3/24/14 7:59 am. The DEFENSE attorney gets SPANKED again by the JUDGE. 1st of all, their dialogue is MUCH different from the U.S. with SOME words and that MUST be factored into the situation. The witness' statement said that *AFTER* the LAST SHOT, the SCREAMING quieted DOWN and THEN, the DEFENSE attorney said that was NOT correct. So, around 33:50 , the JUDGE spoke out and asked what the problem was with the interpretation of the words "It QUIETED DOWN." The DEFENSE tried to EXPLAIN but ONCE again, the DEFENSE was ARROGANT, KNOWING absolutely NOTHING. So, the JUDGE told the DEFENSE that he could argue that to the end of the case, meaning IT WON"T FLY with her. Also, the DEFENSE attorney did NOT even wait on the JUDGE to give her RESPONSE. The DEFENSE attorney just LOOKED ARROGANT and CONTINUED to read his NOTES. The JUDGE seen that the DEFENSE attorney was ARROGANT and said "Okay!" Then the JUDGE said, "You can argue that until the END of the case!" and the DEFENSE attorney said "Indeed My Lady!" I told you. THIS is a VERY COMPETENT JUDGE. She watches EVERY DOT and JITTLE and has a VERY KEEN EAR for CORRECTION. She can ALSO see UNSCRUPULOUS SCHEMES. God has his hand on this case VERY TIGHTLY! Also, the witness testified that the noise QUIETED down, that means, according to the witness that the noise STOPPED. The witness did NOT say that the SCREAMING got LOWER. The witness said in her statement that the noise QUIETED down. The word QUIETED means: not noisy: still: free from noise or commotion. QUIETED can also mean: making little or no noise. At any rate, the witness EXPLAINED what her interpretation of the word is by saying that *AFTER* the last SHOT, there was NO MORE screaming from Reeva.

[@dumplingsmmm]

Well done Mrs Stipp in standing up to tough cross-examination!

[@thehappystack]

At the objection around the 25 minute mark, when they're talking about the witness saying she doesn't remember dogs barking... it's quite correct to object. Unless they can prove dogs were barking, it's an irrelevant question. If she can't remember dogs barking, it could mean no dogs were barking... it really is that simple. Did Pistorius say dogs barked? did any other witnesses? no? then they probably didn't bark, and that's why she didn't remember it. It could be that her memory is fantastic, not failing. And in the later referral to the fact the witness heard dogs barking when they conducted a test a few months prior to the trial beginning, the witness had already stated earlier in her cross-examination that *she had gotten a new dog since then, and that is the one that was barking*. Clearly, Mr. Oldwage's memory has failed *him*. Goodness gracious me, what a carry on over nothing. The witness is a strong witness. Very clear and concise, she doesn't pause to think about her answers and yet they remain consistent. Attempting to trip her up with non-questions about her credibility or reliability is pathetic.

[@Nessie42]

At night time I can hear people talking in the pub over the road quite clearly. Sound travels at night when it is normally quiet around you. When my husband went up a tower in Porchester Hampshire it was quite far away and I could hear peoples conversation up in the tower.

[@blue-sv4wk]

Regarding the number of shots, couldn't there have been some echo effect with all the buildings around, like shouting in a canyon? Kind of like Echo Canyon?

[@tbw92dina4]

my lady is always on alert as hell !! no one fuck with this Jude. Oscar you are really in big trouble ,Your defense just show up.

[@akon9819]

The defence lawyer is just annoying

[@pps1fan]

Why don't they just move forward...what difference does it make if a dogs barked or not...screams have been verified by 3 witnesses so get over the dogs they don't count!

[@Beirut27]

If Bad Runner screams like a girl when he's upset, who knows, his defense lawyers want us to believe he barks in panic ?

[@pps1fan]

Beirut27 hahahaha they may just attempt to prove that theory...every other theory they have presented has been off the wall so wouldn't surprise me :p

[@jamc666]

Hm, there's something I don't quite grasp in this whole case ... Let's say, the first set of sounds were actual shots (three according to this witness) ... then she went on screaming for a good 15 minutes ... then only came the last set of sounds, one of which was the headshot wound that killed her. Say she locks herself up in the toilet, he tries to enter with the bat and/or the gun, she screams out of terror ... then only came the headwound shot and the factual demolition of the door. I'm wondering if the bat didn't came to play earlier in the actual sequence of events.

[@jamc666]

Just thinking out loud ... Assuming they were argueing over her seeing her ex-bf the day before (= motive for murder). She locks herself up in the toilet. He follows her, notices door closed ... he goes to get the bat and the gun. We know from the ballistics expert that the 1st shot was the one to the thigh as she was standing behind the door (shot when OP entered the bathroom). Then comes two bat hits on the door ... She screams in pain for some 15 minutes, sitting wounded on the toilet. Then comes the second noises: the three last shots, 1st shot misses in the wall, the 2nd wounds the arm, the third is fatal. Then OP finishes to demolish the door (= murder).

[@dumplingsmmm]

Light wasn't working in toilet, how convenient for Oscar

[@ericusdaniel7890]

A barking dog would also not believe the liar and murderer

[@bjmd56z]

I believe Oscar, he is far too sweet and soft to kill anyone deliberately, cannot see how justice can be served by him going to prison!

[@malnash6308]

I don’t think this defense lawyer (Oldwadge) is doing the defense any favors. He is so aggressive and arrogant and down right unpleasant. His attempts to get the witness (Anette Stipp) to say something that will substantiate his case are so transparent and at times twisting what the witness has said - for example his attempting to establish a time-line based on her saying she and her husband were perhaps on the big balcony for maybe 10 minutes. He jumped on this and tried to use it as if she had stated it was 10 minutes rather than perhaps 10 minutes. She had said a number of times she couldn’t be at all clear about the timing of things. Again with the issue of dogs barking he was way off base and the judge upheld the prosecutions objections that his line of questioning and assumptions were invalid. I think it is lucky for the defense that this case is being heard in front of a judge rather than a jury since judges are accustomed to lawyers behaving as this one is and their judgment will not be overly influenced by such an unpleasant and at times inaccurate cross examination. I think a jury would hate this guy and therefore look unfavorably upon the defense.

[@rjmadcat]

Dogs barking or did not bark has nothing to do with remembering the f events! Then you might as well say you remember nothing because did you see which stars where positioned where and the position of the moon, and did you see that squirrel in the tree? can you remember a tree moving.. "Roux and Oldwage" " I put it to you that you cannot remember 1 min ago if there was a person in the court that coughed once, twice or perhaps three times" So so idiotic.

[@rjmadcat]

petraheinrichs :D I recall that yes, lol.

[@Apprentice1st]

I absolutely love your answer to That idiot Mr Olwage. nonsense argument "classic" lol

[@danielking9830]

Given the many buildings on the estate and the spaces of more than 50m between houses, could definitely be an echo effect so that 2 bangs is heard as 3...it would be good to have some evidence for this from sound test. Hope the prosecution has considered this as it might be very important.

[@rjmadcat]

OMG I love how this judge looks at the defence at 34:25 ish onwards like his such an idiot and nitpicking.

[@danielking9830]

yeah i noticed that too...! was about to post the exact same time in the comments ;)

[@HaveYouHeardMe]

*The DEFENSE attorney got SPANKED AGAIN!* The *DEFENSE TEAM* is *DESPERATE* for an UP but *CAN'T* find one! * MORE Manipulation from the DEFENSE team to TRY and HELP Oscar's case!* written 3/24/14 (4:52 pm) The VIDEO starts off with the PROSECUTOR (SPANKING) the DEFENSE attorney for an UNSCRUPULOUS ACT that he JUST did. Then, around 3:15 the DEFENSE attorney TOOK THE SPANKING and begins QUESTIONING the witness and ONCE AGAIN, the DEFENSE attorney started off by TRYING to MANIPULATE the witness' testimony. The DEFENSE put to the witness that the witness heard Reeva's LAST scream *AFTER* the 1st shot and THEN, NO MORE! The witness OBJECTED to the FALSE information that was put to her by the DEFENSE attorney and therefore CORRECTED the DEFENSE attorney, thus letting him (KNOW) that she SAID that she heard Reeva screaming *AFTER* the 1st shot and THEN heard Oscar SCREAMING in between Reeva's screaming AND THEN heard MORE SHOTS FIRED and then NO MORE SCREAMING from Reeva! The DEFENSE attorney RESTATED the witness' testimony of what was JUST explained to him around 3:46 and THEREBY (showed) that he had GREAT CLARIFICATION from the witness. Yet, SHORTLY AFTER admitting to having CLARITY via REPEATING the witness' statement BACK to the witness and getting a "THAT'S CORRECT!" answer from the witness, the DEFENSE ATTORNEY around 4:36 (UNSCRUPULOUSLY) and SLYLY put it to the witness *AGAIN* that the WITNESS heard Reeva's LAST SCREAM (AFTER) the 1st SHOT was fired. THEN, the witness OBJECTED AGAIN and had to CORRECT the DEFENSE attorney AGAIN and RESTATE what she had JUST CLARIFIED with the DEFENSE attorney! The REASON WHY the DEFENSE attorney is MISCONSTRUING evidence is because HE wants to make it SEEM LIKE Reeva DIED (AFTER) the 1st SHOT which he would suggest Oscar (NOT) hearing Reeva scream because she was DEAD upon the 1st SHOT but THAT is definitely (NOT) the case according to FORENSICS and according to ALL of the testimonies in regard to Reeva screaming, that I've heard thus far. Oscar KNEW that he was SHOOTING REEVA and SHOT HER and then ARGUED with her and THEN, SHOT at Reeva 3 times.

[@thehappystack]

Around 1:18 is again a deliberate misinterpretation of words by the defence, exploiting the fact the judge doesn't speak Afrikaans. "Slae" and "plofgeluide" are descriptive words in Afrikaans for the same thing. Loud noise. As the witness says, it's semantics about informal terms. "Plofgeluide" are "explosive noises"... "thudding" is an incorrect translation depending on context. Roux did this earlier, when dealing with one of the first witnesses; Mrs. Burger I believe... also using the word "thud". I would be more inclined to use an ambiguous term, like "bangs", which would satisfy both ideas that they were gunshots or very loud, abrupt noises.

[@schuylerjohnson3051]

OP found texts/emails from a former bf of Reeva's, a soccer player (Valentine's Day) and he went ballistic; he went after her with the cricket bat, she hid in the bathroom and he shot her through the door. It is well known and witnessed that if any man stared at Reeva or if he spoke too long with a waiter OP would swell with rage so the truth is not hard to believe, contrary to OP's fairy tale re an intruder who accesses a secure guarded area with cameras everywhere, breaks into a second story window in a house fortified with alarms and dogs, then HIDES in the bathroom! It beggars reason.

[@ashleymerrick5374]

If anyone wants my opinion it could be a possibility that under the kind of horror oscar faced that night it could be that he did scream like a girl. Imagine how it would be to sincerely kill the one you love by mistake

[@danielking9830]

Let us know next time you wake up in the night and fire many shots through your bathroom door because you think there 'might' be an intruder in your house (and don't stop to wake up your partner in bed before doing so)...

[@paulawhitlock2035]

***** Exactly, Daniel King. OP's story makes NO sense.

[@malnash6308]

I agree with what you say about the screams. I have heard men scream when they were beside themselves with fear and their screams could easily be mistaken for the screams of a woman.

[@GooglSucksDisk]

***** ahahaha. I adore sarcasm. common sense is lost on some people, I guess.

[@jamc666]

29:30 ... Note how the defense attorney cannot put two words after one-another without binking as if he's watching at the sun. His bodylanguage speaks books.

[@patrickmahoney5255]

The evidence wasn't there for murder, we will never know, the truth, my view is the actions taken were negligent, and caused the death of Reeva , pre meditated murder was hard to prove , yet the actions taken and the actions that were not taken, are of a serious concern his demise is not punishment enough.

[@TheSkypetrus]

I am wondering if in the South African law something like "crime passionnel", or "crime of passion"? My private hypothesis is this is what could have happened. And I wonder if it would be not better for OP if he would just acknowledge this, instead of defence imputing comically to virtually EVERY witness that that was Oscar who was shouting over the span of four octaves- and in polyphony.

[@dumplingsmmm]

The screams ended with the last shot ie he kept shooting until he was sure she was dead.

[@jaguarundi21]

Are we talking about dogs barking?

[@Cosmickitten2012]

Ha, Defense needs a paddle quickly

[@03patstevens]

OMG the defence lawyer is boring !!!

[@tomknokkel]

Oscar Pistorius thought that coz he doesnt have two legs that he was gonna Kill Reeva and get away with it, so now he can see Gerrie Nel is even more aggressive now , coz Oscar admits nothing he keeps changing his story and lies, he knows he killed her coz he is insecure he was jealous that she talked too other guys. He was controlling her and Oscar already got another girlfriend that shows you how fast he moved on with his life coz he murdered Reeva, This trial took him by surprise he doesnt have legs anymore, but he is still alive but Reeva is dead coz of him

[@stephenbrooke5860]

I am extrapolating from some of the testimony here, but does anyone know whether the defense was actually outside the witness'es residence some time last week, conducting sound tests with various male/female/high-pitched male voices during the evening?

[@jamc666]

Well, take a silent neighbourhood in the middle of the night, add a little wind to carry the sound, add a screaming female in a toilet (which, btw acts as an amplifier) and you come to >50m. Whereas, nobody said they actually heard what was said, they only heard screaming ... and I bet my shirt that a female scared to death will make a lot more noise than any "simulation".

[@jamc666]

yup ... and the argument made by the defense "it might habe been OP screaming like a female" is so laughable ... So, gotta get some rest. Good night Meleka. Next episode, tomorrow, same place, same time ;)

[@SelamatArtist]

jamc666 Noises travel far in the still of the night!

[@03patstevens]

Oscar was dating above him self, he was and is not worthy of someone beautiful, he is full of his own belief that he is fantastic, sadly not, there are many people out there who have worse disabilities than him and go on to achieve, and have nice lives he is a bully I hope he goes down for life. !!!

[@Nessie42]

Mr Oldwage has trouble understanding everything.

[@HaveYouHeardMe]

*The DEFENSE get's SPANKED AGAIN!* written 3/24/14 (7:18 pm) Oscar hired some PITIFUL attorneys. The PROSECUTOR (and) the JUDGE spanked the DEFENSE attorney AGAIN! Around 25:25 The DEFENSE attorney tried to put to the witness that it was the 2ND time that her recollection of the events were NOT that good and he went on to make the witness out to be a LIAR but around 25:39 the PROSECUTOR and the JUDGE spoke up and SPANKED the DEFENSE attorney and put him in his PROPER PLACE with his ARROGANT self. Like the bible says, "They are ARROGANT KNOWING NOTHING!" After the DEFENSE attorney could NOT get his way with the JUDGE, he does NOT apologize but says "My Lady I'll move on!" and then the JUDGE said "Yes" as he ended his argument with the judge. Also, the witness DID admit to making a mistake on her written statement but the DEFENSE attorney TRIED to use her CORRECTION against her and make it SEEM that the witness is NOT a credible witness. However, IF the witness would have carried on with her statement KNOWING that it was an error on it and NEVER admitted her fault, then it would have DEFINITELY been wrong of her. Yet, over a year ago, the witness CROSSED out information and then initialed her correction on her statement.

[@sara-yq6nv]

Im so lots I dont know what's going on anymore

[@krisuk333]

I thought Olwage did quite a poor job, he made the defense looks very desperate, very bias and unrealistic, you want to convincingly put the evidence in the favor of the defense rather then force it. The dogs barking was embarrassing, she heard no dogs because she bough the dog that barks after the event, so she heard no other sounds that night, pretty simple.

[@ericusdaniel7890]

A Brick would have found him quilty after the first day .a brick is a clever thing

[@kenford2234]

Oldwage is horrible! He may have gotten Pistorius's brother off a culpable homicide charge but here he was rubbish. I'd bet MiLady thinks he's horrible too btw...

[@cruncyPopadum]

so did the dogs bark ??

[@Beirut27]

annie4664 I totally agree, the house is ugly and claustrophobic, a waste of good money, even with the security.

[@suniltunwer]

Wow who is that blonde bombshell behind Oldwage? She is amazing!!!!

[@suria2299]

Law student.

[@ENGLAND4GZ]

defense is just a joke

[@digontosaad2457]

Shakia

[@ENGLAND4GZ]

pompass ass